Thread by @CoppetainPU

There has been some interesting reporting of Sunday’s EU-US deal on steel and aluminium.

But the fact is, a lot of it is speculation because some details have not yet been revealed and negotiations on others have only just begun

(Thanks to various experts for the links)

1/10

First, a transcript of a White House briefing, including:

• The size of the tariff quotas—still to be announced
• The start of talks on a deal focusing on carbon intensity in the metals
• Avoiding Chinese content in EU steel—“melt-and-pour”

2/10 whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/…

Next, @bentleyballan and @toddntucker in the Washington Post

Is this bigger than news from Glasgow? Will it transform the fight against climate change?

Depends on the outcome of negotiations, including how many other countries join in. Early days.

3/10 washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

Some trade experts have picked up this⬇️

Thoughts

• Yes WTO agreements are fundamentally political in the sense that trade policy is fundamentally political. What matters is the direction of the politics (unilateral? multilateral? something else?)

4/10 washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

• Yes WTO agreements are open to change—that’s what negotiations do

But would this deal change WTO agreements?

The agreements have always allowed countries to strike their own deals—“WTO-plus”—provided they don’t hurt other WTO member countries

5/10 washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

Will the to-be-negotiated “global” deal put some countries at a disadvantage? Maybe.

The authors say that China (the main target) “may well meet and exceed the standards”—in which case, no problem. We’ll see.

6/10 washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

Will it won’t change WTO agreements? Only if the deal or its principles on carbon intensity is brought into the WTO.

We’re a long, long way away from from any of that.

7/10 washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

The article concludes:

“Thus, the deal envisions both novel rules to green the steel sector with more traditional trade stabilization rules to guard against import floods.”

But the method is notorious tariff quotas —> economic rent and rent-seeking

8/10 washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

Meanwhile, @StephenOlsonHF of the Hinrich Foundation, says the EU-US deal reinforces “managed trade” rather than “free trade”, which never existed.

He calls it “a job well done” but also “an affirmation of Trump’s approach to trade”

9/10 hinrichfoundation.com/research/artic…

“In any event, a recalibration of our approach to trade is underway,” he says

But the system isn’t only about freer trade. It’s also about rules-based trade policies. So a separate question: does this move weaken or strengthen multilateralism?

10/10 hinrichfoundation.com/research/artic…

Lots more interesting and detailed comment, private and public, today.

Here's another⬇️. A “managed-trade quagmire”.

“The only clear beneficiaries will be the European exporters lucky enough to win duty-free quota allocations (“rents”) and the lawyers.”